GravediggerHebner

If Mejia were a 32 year old has been/never was keeping him in a middle relief role would at least make some sense. That he is a 20 year old starting pitching prospect makes keeping him in a middle relief role on a 2-5 team ridiculous.

At least if he were the 8th inning man on a 5-2 team, contributing to wins by bridging the gap between starters and the closer, his presence could be loosely justified. But the team isn't winning, and the starters aren't pitching 7 innings, and Mejia is being wasted as a mop up man.

If anyone with any baseball sense were running this organization they would see that and he would be sent to the minor leagues to be stretched out as and continue his development as a starting pitcher. But...

I find Francoeur's honesty about the record vis a vis the schedule refreshing. In fact, he's slightly more optimistic than I am. When I looked at the schedule at the end of spring training, my expectation was that the team would be 10-12 entering the series at Philly at the end of the month. So if he's right I'll consider it a positive development.

Niese seemed on the verge of disaster in the 2nd with the HBP and the 2 walks but finished that inning strong and has been smooth since then. I know it's hard to tell from your vantage point and perhaps this is better asked after the game when you can speak with the parties involved, but was there some specific turning point that snapped Niese back such as a visit from Warthen or Blanco, or just Niese on his own maybe stepping off taking a deep breath and re-focusing?

I ask because too often I've seen Mets starting pitchers on the verge of disaster succumb to that disaster and I was pleased that Niese escaped unscathed.

Maine's start today, despite it's poor ending related to his stomach virus, was perhaps the most encouraging outing by any prospective Mets starting pitcher this spring. It was long overdue for somebody expected to start for the Mets this season to show something positive on the mound. Better late than never.

That's not a good reason in my opinion. The reason the Mets sought to replace Santos was widely reported to be because of his poor defensive and game calling abilities. Why have the guy they regard so poorly defensively tutor their future starter on defense? It just doesn't add up to me. If anything, it should have been Santos that was waived, not Coste.

Mr. Costa, do you have any insight into the reason(s) behind Coste being waived?

I recall when he was signed a big deal was made out of the fact that he was placed on the 40 man roster. Have they cut him because they need a spot on that roster? Or did they just not like what they saw from him up close? Or something else?

I don't really care that he's no longer in the organization, I just find it odd that he went from "Thole's tutor" to being cut before the season started.

I appreciate that it was a very small sample so I'm not being declarative at all about this but what I filed away in the back of my mind after today's game is that Takahashi might be a pitcher who is most successful only facing a lineup once, in other words a relief pitcher. I don't have the game log in front of me but it sure seemed like he got through the lineup once OK, then got knocked around. 4 hits in 3 innings isn't alarming, but the fact that they were all extra base hits was. Maybe he was just tired going 3 innings.

For him to retain that description he has to perform. After 2010 he will have hit his 3rd arbitration year and the specter of non-tender awaits him as the Mets are unlikely to pay him many millions of dollars to continue being injured/inconsistent, especially given that they finally have some prospects that may usurp him (I would feel more confident in that statement if I knew that Jenrry Mejia were going to the minors to continue his progress as a starter).

4 trips to the DL totaling 186 days over the last 4 years, that trend can't continue.

15 starts in 2009, 2 beyond 6 innings. 25 starts in 2008, 5 beyond 6 innings. Unacceptable. He needs to get back to the 2007 John Maine, when he made 32 starts and pitched beyond 6 innings 12 times. If he can do that, he will prove to the fans and the organization that he's worth paying and worth keeping around.

My only fear with Takahashi even if he performs well is that coming from Japan where he pitched once a week and threw more than 164 innings in a single season only once (183) is that he will hit a wall and not make it through the entire season as a starter. But the Mets should have options at their disposal if/when that scenario unfolds and in the meanwhile can take advantage of the league's lack of familiarity with Takahashi.

I often read and hear interviews with relief pitchers in which they crave defined roles. They never say those roles can't be changed, just that they would like to know what to expect on a given night at the ballpark.

They sit in the pen in a game in which their team has a close lead and think "I'm going in in the (blank) inning." If that thought process is upset for them, as childish as it may seem, then it becomes an excuse for them to fail. "I didn't expect Jerry to call on me then."

So whether someone has the same role on August 1st that they do on April 5th doesn't seem terribly important but that they have some defined role on April 5th until told that they have a new role seems very important. Someone, whether for a day, a week, a month or for 6 months needs to think "I'm the (blank) inning guy."

If the bullpen is filled with Frankie Rodriguez and 5 or 6 guys who think "I'm the ? guy" when they're sitting out there, I don't think it will turn out well. I hope Jerry will define some roles to start. He retains the right to redefine them later.

I understand and appreciate the reasons you folks mention above why Santana winning 20 is unlikely.

A closer look at his 2004 game logs reveals some interesting things.

After his 12th start on June 3rd he was 2-4 with a 5.50 ERA. He hadn't pitched beyond the 7th inning at all and had 1 start each in which he had surrendered 7, 6 and 5 earned runs respectively.

Then he went nuts: After that June 3rd start he allowed more than 2 earned runs in a start exactly once for the remainder of the season (and in that start he allowed, you guessed it, 3 earned runs). In his final 22 starts that season he failed to go at least 7 innings only 4 times and he struck out at least 10 batters 12 times.

So I think that's the formula for him to win 20 games. Go at least 7 innings, strike out at least 10 and allow no more than 2 earned runs.

If Santana can pitch like that again, this Mets offense, even without Reyes and Beltran for a portion of the season, should be able to score on par with that uninspiring 2004 Minnesota offense I noted above, and Santana could once again win 20 games.

Martinez is getting a lot of playing time in CF recently. I wonder what if anything I should read into that.

I'm very excited about 2010 for Johan Santana based on the knowledge that the last time he had bone chips removed from his elbow he responded with a 20-6, 2.61 season, leading the league in Ks with 265 and winning a Cy Young, with Henry Blanco as his primary catcher. Perhaps the stars have aligned again.

I'll take the over on Beltran games played if 75 is the number. I believe he'll return in the middle of May (so you can keep that hat on your head) and will need some periodic rest throughout the balance of the season, which would put his final 2010 games started number at roughly 100.

It's my opinion that the Mets traded for Matthews because the Angels picked up the vast majority of his ridiculous salary, Brian Stokes is a marginal 30 year old middle reliever who was not guaranteed to make the 25 man roster, and the Mets organizational depth chart at CF went something like Beltran, Pagan, Jesus Feliciano, Kirk Nieuwenhuis. It's hard to include Fernando Martinez on that chart given his age, experience and injury history.

So in my opinion they brought on some MLB experience at a position that sorely lacked it and didn't lose much in doing so.

Martinez has yet to play more than 90 games in any one season and has yet to prove he can stay healthy for any one full season.

Gaudy numbers in tiny sample against questionable competition at spring training notwithstanding he should perhaps prove he can break the 100 game barrier healthy before being given a job in the majors.

Given the Mets recent run of health woes if Martinez proves healthy and productive at Buffalo he will get an opportunity this season to show his talents in Queens, prior to his taking over the everyday RF job in 2011.

I do recall Joe Smith but I don't think he's an apt comparison. Smith was a reliever in college and a reliever in the minors, and the organization projected him as a reliever in the majors.

Mejia has been a starter in the minors. I believe the organization projects him as a major league starter in the future.

In that light I think Joba Chamberlain is a more apt comparison than Joe Smith. Chamberlain turned out to be an excellent reliever in the majors but his transition to reliever may have contributed to his thus far being a mediocre-at-best starter.

So if the Mets want Mejia to be a starter in the future perhaps they should heed the example of Chamberlain and keep Mejia a starter. If they don't feel he will be a starter then by all means they should promote him this April to the bullpen where I believe he would do well, but they should be prepared that it might preclude his becoming a starter in the future.

Obviously it might not, it's not an absolute, but it's something to consider as the organization decides what they want Mejia's future to be.